Incorrect. Depends on the type of land and what type of jurisdiction applies. On federal land, a federal agencies will have either exclusive, concurrent (with the state or fellow agency) or proprietary jurisdiction, which means some measure of both the state's and typical federal authority depending on what was agreed upon in the state/federal dealings.

On state land, federal agencies have no area based jurisdiction, but may have some measure of subject matter jurisdiction, such as US Fish and Wildlife Service agents enforcing applicable endangered species or fish and game regulations etc.

When in doubt, read the state regs.



Uh, federal means works for the federal government. State patrol and Washington Dept of Fish and Wildlife are state agencies, not federal.



It doesn't sounds like you are referencing an area that would be federally controlled, but more likely state, county, or city, not sure how it works down there. Even so, more often than not, federal agencies will adopt city and state regs when they don't have a law on point that addresses a given issue. In areas of exclusive or concurrent jurisdiction, federal agencies have the authority to adopt and state regulations as their own and typically do.

Regardless, nothing wrong with reporting a legal kill to enforcement agencies. I think it is often good for them to interact with legal hunters as well as illegal ones, you know, just to make sure all is well.

i was always under the impression that WDFW agents were Federal agents, and since they are employed by the WSP, that would make the WSP a Federal Agency as well... oh well, i guess if i keep being that scared, i surely wont get in trouble... not like i would ever do anything to get in trouble in the first place...

WDFW are NOT employed by WSP, they work for WDFW. There have been efforst to move them to WSP, but so far those have failed.

hmmm, guess you learn something new everyday.. i always thought that they were together..

This is Washington, not Oregon.

And where did the idea that WDFW was Federal come from?

the fact that they have the power to enforce everything in the state, and i think someone else told me that... actually, multiple people have told me that, guess i shouldnt listen to people so much probably...

either way, if this was an illegal kill, in a "no shooting zone" he would have went to jail, and not have been able to keep the deer.. regardless of who showed up..

WDFW officers are genral law enforcement. They have passed particular specific training and certification that allows them to enforce state and local laws within WA. Any state/local law enforcement angency could get this, with the appropriate training. Lacking that, an officer can enforce only certain laws.

I believe, for example, that Ecology and DNR enforcement can only enforce their particular agency laws.

Eco and DNR can only enforce laws on their lands correct?

for example, if you did a big ass burnout on a back road somewere, and a DNR cop (although not on his land) drives by, they cant do anything, were as, if a WDFW agent comes by, they can cite you for wreckless driving, although, they would probably hold you there until local LE showed up, but they still can cite you for it... correct?

I believe DNR and DOE can enforce their rules. DOE has no land, they have rules. DNR has both, but I don't think they can cite you for breaking a WDFW rule, even on DNR land.

Need one of the current or former enforcement officers on PP to chime in.

As described above, on federal land where the enforcement agency has either concurrent or exclusive jurisdiction, the federal agency can assimilate state laws as long as they don't have a federal law on point for the given offence. Most traffice laws for example, do not exist in federal law, but can be enforced on fed lands based on the code cited below.

Assimilative Crimes Act, 18 U.S.C. § 13
The Assimilative Crimes Act, 18 U.S.C. § 13, makes state law applicable to conduct occurring on lands reserved or acquired by the Federal government as provided in 18 U.S.C. § 7(3), when the act or omission is not made punishable by an enactment of Congress.

With regard to federal agencies authority on state land, it varies from state to state. Some states grant federal agencies enforcement officers deputy or peace office status which allows them to enforce some (or all) state laws on state lands. Alaska for example, offers USFWS and NPS enforcement state authority on state lands (state wildlife trooper equivalent) for fish and game regulations only. The motivation for this cross deputization is typically to support joint missions and objectives in areas of reduced resources and man power. Rural communities for example. In cases where this type of federal/state crossover exists, the office should have a credential explaining their area of jurisdiction and given authority with such.

As a rule of thumb though, federal folks work on federal land and state folks work on state land...or something like that.

Again subject matter jurisdiction is different entirely and is much less limited by land boundaries and ownership.

Little confused here. Was the deer shot while in your back forty? If not then not much can be done. You have to live with the deer and neighbors. Trust me I have had more than my fare share of @ssh@ts for neighbors too. If he would have used a crossbow or just been less of an idiot this whole thing might have been avoided. #1 never approach a man armed with a gun and pester him about him breaking the law. Let the 50's take care of it. Where you greater than 500' off a public road? Does not matter if you are dead. More time to process scenario could have saved you a headache or atleast lessen your chances of an armed altercation. Oops failed to ask. Is he a first nationer fellow? They like their hunting easy. Say 12pm at oak creek during feeding time.

Sound piece of advice right there!

if the deer was shot on his property, that would be an illegal kill, and he would have been taken to jail, and the deer confiscated, for breaking the hunting laws...

and +1 about aproaching an armed person and pestering them... on your property or not..

Again, not necessarily. The officer likely has a fair amount of discretion as to what is an arrestable offence, whether or not to issue citations, and how evidence (illegally taken game for example) is handled.

every idiot i know that has taken game illegally has been taken to jail, and some even have lost their hunting privledges... but then again, you probably are right, some wardens may not want to deal with the hassle, and just issue a citation and let them deal with it in court...

i just play by the rules period, i enjoy my outdoor activities/privledges, and i intend to keep them

Maybe he was a she?

Don't be such a sexist, chauvanist pig

Oops, I said pig. Probably poor form in a cop thread.

There's not really any reason that I posted that pic, beyond the fact that I really wanted to but couldn't really find anywhere appropriate to do so...and since nowhere was appropriate, that kinda means anywhere was.

Fish on...

Todd

P.S. Beware the Drunken Octopus.

Sums it up perfectly I think.

Good show.

the big game regs state

Firearms Restrictions
Thurston
GMU666 (Deschutes) North of U.S. Highway 101 and I-5 between Oyster Bay and the mouth of Nisqually River.

if you are in that area, its a no shooting zone according to the regs, and therefore would be illegal to hunt with a firearm..

upon further reading, im not 100% correct.. you may use shotguns, bows, crossbows, muzzleloaders, and revolver type pistols, just not centerfire or rim fire rifles...

from the Firearms restrictions page in the pamphlet


Firearm Restriction Areas
It is unlawful to hunt wildlife in the following firearm
restriction areas with centerfire or rimfire rifles, or
to fail to comply with additional firearm restrictions,
except as established below.

In firearm restriction areas, hunters may hunt only
during the season allowed by their tag.

Archery tag holders may only hunt during
archery seasons with archery equipment.

Muzzleloader tag holders may only
hunt during muzzleloader seasons with
muzzleloader equipment.

Modern firearm tag holders may hunt
during modern firearm seasons with bows
and arrows, crossbows, muzzleloaders,
revolver-type handguns meeting
equipment restrictions, or legal shotguns firing slugs or buckshot.

so shotguns would be allowed in the no shooting zone, just not rimfire rifles, or centerfire rifles... basically they dont want dickweeds out there with .300 win mags shooting within 1000 yards of someones home and not paying attention, and killing someone... would be quite hard for the allowed weapons to acheive that... if even possible..